A small engine aircraft shouldn't have turned into a small burned spot with no wreckage. In my opinion that indicates a mid-air break up. What breaks up a plane in mid-air? A missile would.
The flares are a bit of an odd detail though. If they had shot a missile or missiles and they wanted to hide it, a flares excuse could work to throw any eyewitness accounts into doubt.
The photos are highly suspicious. Modern airframes are built to handle incredible levels of stress. The debris from the crash looks far more like a craft that was shot down with an air to air missile than one that crashed "normally". A normal crash would leave much larger pieces of wreckage based on my experience.
However, I would invite any planefags to correct me here.
EDIT: A fellow pede wisely pointed out that if the craft was shot down, we'd see a much wider, more scattered debris field. So either the plane somehow disintegrated on impact, or these photos are completely contrived. But again, I'll defer to any planefags on here that can correct me. Just odd to me to see a crash result in such tiny fragments given the engineering involved.
if an air to air missile vaporized the plane in the air, it would be spread out over a very large area. if the missile didn't vaporize it and only destroyed half, there would be an impact site with half a plane.
if i had to make a wild guess... it looks kindof like a normal crash site that has been combed for evidence and torched.
that seems a bit far fetched too, though. but possible if someone were determined enough
It didn't crash. They shot it down, and it came down in pieces.
If the tracking reports are accurate it was a plane. Missiles don't make a loop over New York before heading back to a target in DC.
where's the evidence that it was shot down?
I'm waiting for the government to admit it.
why though? there's nothong to suggest it was shot down
A small engine aircraft shouldn't have turned into a small burned spot with no wreckage. In my opinion that indicates a mid-air break up. What breaks up a plane in mid-air? A missile would.
The flares are a bit of an odd detail though. If they had shot a missile or missiles and they wanted to hide it, a flares excuse could work to throw any eyewitness accounts into doubt.
The photos are highly suspicious. Modern airframes are built to handle incredible levels of stress. The debris from the crash looks far more like a craft that was shot down with an air to air missile than one that crashed "normally". A normal crash would leave much larger pieces of wreckage based on my experience.
However, I would invite any planefags to correct me here.
EDIT: A fellow pede wisely pointed out that if the craft was shot down, we'd see a much wider, more scattered debris field. So either the plane somehow disintegrated on impact, or these photos are completely contrived. But again, I'll defer to any planefags on here that can correct me. Just odd to me to see a crash result in such tiny fragments given the engineering involved.
if an air to air missile vaporized the plane in the air, it would be spread out over a very large area. if the missile didn't vaporize it and only destroyed half, there would be an impact site with half a plane.
if i had to make a wild guess... it looks kindof like a normal crash site that has been combed for evidence and torched.
that seems a bit far fetched too, though. but possible if someone were determined enough
That's a good point, 289. One would expect the debris field to be much wider than this if the craft was shot down.